REMEMBER WHEN BUSH PROMISED US THE PRICE OF GAS WOULD DROP IF WE LET HIM INVADE IRAQ? ANOTHER ONE THAT BACKFIRED

Gas prices decreased significantly just before the midterm elections. That out of the way, they've been spiking upwards ever since and are out of control. It feels as though the big energy corporations are grabbing whatever they can now before their political protection is annihilated. 80% of Americans tell pollsters they feel gas prices are unreasonable and over 75% think prices will reach $4.00/gallon this year.

I don't think it is a coincidence that what's left of Bush's miserable, discredited regime was described in today's U.S. News & World Report as a sinking presidency or that more and more alarmed Americans realize that our nation's leader is clearly delusional. Nor is it merely a coimcidence that Bush's latest job approval rating is a dismal 28%. The mosr recent Newsweek paints a very gloomy picture for the far right.

It’s hard to say which is worse news for Republicans: that George W. Bush now has the worst approval rating of an American president in a generation, or that he seems to be dragging every ’08 Republican presidential candidate down with him. But According to the new Newsweek poll, the public’s approval of Bush has sunk to 28 percent, an all-time low for this president in our poll, and a point lower than Gallup recorded for his father at Bush Sr.’s nadir. The last president to be this unpopular was Jimmy Carter who also scored a 28 percent approval in 1979. This remarkably low rating seems to be casting a dark shadow over the GOP’s chances for victory in ’08. The Newsweek Poll finds each of the leading Democratic contenders beating the Republican frontrunners in head-to-head matchups.

I guess it isn't a coincidence either that Bush's name didn't get mentioned much-- like once?-- in the GOP presidential debate. Apparently Newt Gingrich thinks mentioning Bush even once is one time too many for the health of the GOP. Republicans running for re-election are jittery about Iraq and pessimists among them are seeing another 5 or even 6 Senate seats falling from their grasp-- and giving Reid the 60 he needs to end right wing hegemony once and for all (although even in that scenario Lieberman is, as usual, the fly in the ointment). Gasoline prices, which are already at relative summer price peaks in May that shouldn't happen until late summer, could be the nail in the GOP coffin while they wring their hands in despair over their 7 years of utter rubber stamp posture towards the thoroughly discredited Bush and Cheney agenda on Iraq. Republican Bob Inglis of South Carolina told the Washington Post that "The hallway talk is very different from the podium talk." He isn't the only Republican who feels that funding further military operations in Iraq with no strings attached does not make practical or political sense. Even utter right wing hacks of the very worst order, like Jack Kingston of Georgia, a district that gave Bush 68% of its vote in 2004 (and 68% to Kingston last year) are getting uncomfortable. "The marketplace has become ripe for a new idea," blurted out Kingston in desperation last week. "We have to be engaged developing our own proposals and not just going along with what the executive branch is doing," said Charlie Bostany (R-LA), who has not varied from the Bush line even once, as you can see in his atrocious and disgraceful voting record.

Two weeks ago Roll Call reported that "Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.), a leading moderate, said many Republicans are looking for a way out of Iraq, and he hopes that the Democrats will work with them after Bush likely vetoes the $124 billion war supplemental this week. 'I think a lot of us feel that the time has come for us to look for solutions to bring this war to a close,' Castle said. 'And I don't think that's just a feeling among moderate Republicans but among Republicans in general.' Castle said Republicans of all stripes 'are very reluctant to put in dates on our Army' but said that other ideas, including Blunt's talk of a 'consequences package' for the Iraqi government, could bring the parties together." In the same story, even Minority Whip Roy Blunt, said "Republicans could support binding benchmarks on the Iraqi government tied to a 'consequences package.'"

Something tells me that the American voters will be delivering a consequence package of their own come November, 2008. Rubber stamp Ohio Senator George Voinovich is dreaming that it's going to be a painless situation. Acknowledging that Bush has no choice but to compromise with congressional Democrats and accept conditions under which the war can continue, he says that "at a minimum, the Iraqi government-- or what passes for one-- must reduce the sectarian anarchy and bloodshed that make the U.S. military presence in that country so dangerous. 'That's how it's done,' explains Mr. Voinovich. 'Everybody holds their nose and maybe a couple of times vomits, but you get it done.'" Not that quick, Mister. I know Republicans don't like to acknowledge consequences for their behavior, but that's just around the bend-- and it's more than just puking.


UPDATE: ANOTHER TOTAL BUSH REGIME SHILL, RACIST REPUBLICAN TRENT LOTT, IS MUTTERING ABOUT IRAQ

Much like Boehner's passive/aggressive blabbling about Iraq last week, today Trent Lott warned Bush-- or, more to the point, showboated for low-info voters back home-- that he's fed up with the incompetence of leadership in Iraq policy. "'I do think this fall we have to see some significant changes on the ground, in Baghdad and other surrounding areas,' Lott, R-Miss., told reporters. Lott declined to say what he thinks should happen if Congress does not see improvement in the security situation by then. But he said lawmakers have time before they must decide."